I mean, throughout most of our nation’s history, interracial couples in most states broke the law if they dared to marry... Judges, long seeing the supposed crime of interracial marriage as a threat to the natural order of things, reacted with stern sermonettes that today give us a window back to a human rights controversy that in many ways parallels the current legal battle for same-sex marriage.

Pretty much, and they're just as specious. In time, it'll become the non-issue it should be.

I agree 100%. I don't know what else to say. It is very upsetting.

Yeah, pretty much -- it's "unnatural" and so on.

whatever the topic, gay marriage is just plain wrong.

People argue that it's not the same. But it is similar in that people see it as people who are "different" shouldn't be allowed to marry each other. It's discrimination either way. I am a lesbian, and I WILL legally marry one day! I have no issue with interracial marriage/relationships, either...as we have that in our family as well.

There is no doubt that the attempts to deny equal rights to same-sex couples is the same action as denying interracial couples equal rights in the 1950s and 1960s. The battle to convince most people in America of this fact has been won, and it’s only a matter of time before this becomes the law of the land, either through court rulings for ‘equal protection’ or through new laws supporting same-sex marriage or both. The extreme right wing religious fanatics are the last folks to hang on to their hatred of gays, and they are driving the movements to pass state constitutional amendments so that ‘their children’ can’t have a choice, once they’re dead and gone. In other words, most Evangelical parents see that they are losing this battle, and they want to codify their hatred to try to avoid positive court rulings in gays’ favor. The movement to pass state amendments seems to have peaked and is now declining. The Republican Party has used this issue to manipulate Evangelicals and other extremist fanatics, but younger Evangelicals and Roman Catholics are seeing through the manipulation and rejecting the ‘hate church’ attitudes. Even so, last year the Florida Republicans were caught secretly funding the amendment drive for an anti-gay marriage amendment — and they were successful in helping to get it on the ballot this Fall — in hopes that if they bring out the religious extremists to hurt gays, these same extremist would tend to vote Republican in other races, tilting the race to the GOP again.

I am married to a filipino and never had any issues with my family. If I were homosexual, that would be a different story. So to answer the question it is probably similar but not the same.

Some of the arguments are but not all. Mixed-race heterosexual couples are still capable of reproducing naturally so those that believe that the ability to sire/bear children should determine whether you have the right to be a couple may make that argument. EDIT - 9 May 08, 2035EDT - Response to Wide Awake Phoenix I apologize if I appear to have claimed otherwise. My wife and I also chose not to reproduce and now, after a brief outpatient surgery, I am unable to reproduce so I fall into the "barren" category. Should my marriage end because of a vasectomy? If so, how does that affect post-menopausal women? Are their marriages less valid? As for 'reproducing naturally', all I meant by that was that a woman can't impregnate another woman without outside aid (no sperm of their own; either use science (artificial insemination) or have an affair, and both involve a male third-party) and a man can't be impregnated regardless of the gender of their partner. I agree wholeheartedly that the ability for a couple to reproduce should NOT be used as a criteria for whether a relationship is worthy of legal recognition. My point was merely that there are people that think that way and thus WOULD make that argument. Nothing more.

Exactly. The "arguments" are just as prejudiced and bigoted, and have the same moral standing.

This question assumes that one cannot choose their sexual preferance-just as one cannot choose their race. That fact has not been proven as being true and if you look at human anatomy people are "programmed" to like the opposite gender-and there is NO scientific evidence that has proven that there are some genetic anomalies that are attracted to their own gender. So I would have to say no.

I think so. Ther is no reason for it to be banned. Luckily history will repeat itself and like interacail couples are ow allowed to marry, so will gay couples, in the future.